sammy7

hay thanks dude give me a min thanks (based on your profile i will assume they are PRSL) thanks

the article john cuthber posted-nothing. i didnt find a single peer reviewed scientific literature article in those links ?my question-fellow human beings lol please find me one peer reviewed scientific literature article (immunology or microbiology might be were to look i have no idea you tell me) "showing" vaccines to be efficacious. i will leave it up to you to define "efficacious" . it should be noted that the assumption x didnt happen because we did z is obviously untenable. also when i say "peer reviewed scientific literature" perhaps its best if i say what i DONT mean- i DONT mean-a mainstream media story and i DONT mean someones blog i DO mean-peer reviewed scientific literature ok? THANKS lol

CHALLENGE TO MY FELLOW MEN. please find me one peer reviewed literature article "showing" vaccines "work". one at a time please thanks for reading (please read the actual literature yourself first and not just the abstract thanks)

chart page 3 for someone who thinks science "proves" vaccines please read and cite one peer reviewed literature thanks. just one at a time. Image removed - in violation of copyright laws.

literature attached see page 3 for chart

ok. lenskis ecoli-horizontal gene transfer, those hox genes-over/under expressing genes for body parts (no "new" genes coming into being), nylonase http://aem.asm.org/content/61/5/2020.full.pdf "Though a molecular basis for the emergence of nylon oligomer metabolism in PAO5502 is still unknown" human chromosome 2-assigning unobserved cause in past to account for telemores today. please what other "rock solid" evidence is there for this rofl process? my original post is-addition of NEW GENES which code for NEW proteins which serve a NEW purpose is factual in that it i was stating it is IMPOSSIBLE. please do cite some literature showing how copies of genes assume a new purpose...please....i will wait....no "thought" experiments please and also please do actually read the literature yourself before citing THANKS A LOT

bp,s code codons which code aa's. letters code a sentence which organized correctly yields INFORMATION. bp's sequenced "correctly" code codons which code for a FUNCTIONAL protein WHICH=INFORMATION I CANT HELP ANY MORE IM SORRY PLEASE LOCK UP THIS THREAD GAME OVER LIFE.

neofunctionalization. the delusion i mean hypothesis that multiple copies of existing genes by mutation, *somehow* (laws of the universe aside obviously as always with these stories ) gain a new "function" while one copy retains the ancestral function. so and please comment on this, if say 1000bp gene coding for collagen gets copied twice instead of once the delusion i mean hypothesis is that the ancestral gene still codes for collagen while the extra copy now codes for something "new". ok where did this new sequence of bp come from considering it was a copy? prediction-if i search google scholar which i will waste time doing for the next few hours on this retarded thought experiment i will find that when these mutations do happen and multiple copies of existing genes are made they will almost always be deleterious......ill elaborate more on this nonsense, how is new sequencing of bp,s achieved considering its just a copy? and please do elaborate on how DOWN SYNDROME is an addition of new "functional" information.... btw information is "meta" if you will. has no mass. cant weigh it. its not matter and its not energy. it is information. like me talking across the room to someone. it is not matter and its not energy yet has a real cause and effect in our world. enter dna. idiot says-"dna is just a molecule it contains no information its just matter" someone with brain reads on dna for 1/2 an hour and says "hay i get it now" ie- the sequence of base pairs is such that it CORRECTLY codes for a FUNCTIONAL protein. mess around with that order and you get a protein that is junk. is this right? 200aa protein-all bp in right sequence up until the last few bp's say, 199aa's in correct sequence, last bp's being wrong code for a different aa than what the protein inherently needs to "work" and you have a "dud" protein because the last 1 out of 199 was "wrong". DNA CONTAINS "INFORMATION" FUNCTIONAL INFORMATION lol. IF SOMEONE MISSES THIS I CANT HELP THEM. GOD HELP US ALL ARRGGGGGHHHHH!!!! looooool THANKS FOR READING

hay thanks for the guess. i wont give hints till a bunch of more people have had a shot....maybe a few hours maybe a day.....please state thinkings/workings too

this may be slightly retarded but w/e. k guy rocks up to the er. weak confused says he feels "very very" unwell and "i cannot i cannot" walk very well. says hes been eating only white rice for months. initial thoughts?

haha easy game ok. sometimes the people who buy me, buy me for someone else. the people who sell me will only need one of me. the people who use me have no knowledge of my being. what am i?

sorry just to clarify qiojewriohweohrwejhjwejrwekjewrjkewrkewrkjhewrjhwerhwejrejkwekwrejjkewrhkjrwekrwejkjh hi what are you doing the first sequence contains more "statistical" information than the second one. the second one has (obv) more "functional information"...this is all that matters.........if you wanna give me a real life example of a huge increase in codons (which would have to be a increase in nucleic acids) ok sure im listening.... thanks for reading my original post is vv accurate imo thanks

hay what happened with one of the links?? i had to sign up will make it available then...yah also andrew wakefied still has his literature on there but its got "retracted" stamped all over it....guy does science-destroys his career. also in case i have to point out look at the control group in the first literature....thanks are you in the medical profession john cuthber?

too eeeasssyy vv good.

hay i get what your saying about the aa's/codons then, could you please just explain trisomy right here for me please and how "functional" information is added? also natural selection is meaningless unless something new arises to act on....natural selection explains the survival of the fittest not the arrival of the fittest lol (kinda gay i know) hay i dont know the answer to this? some bacteria have huge genomes right? flaviobacterium or something? so there is no correlation between genome size and organism complexity...i still stand on my original post...

thats a very good definition i propose one mortal man who was a genius or who was leaps and bounds above others in history id have to say one man....nikola tesla

ok without using google and insta winning something you own but other people use more than you? two deaf chimney sweepers up cleaning a roof. roof collapses. they stand there looking at each other. one has a dirty face one has a clean face. the one with the dirty face doesnt wash his face.the one with the clean face does. why?

ml, megalitre 10^6, microlitre 10^-6, mali, where did the 1.85 come from? yawn easy game lol...cheated like hell on google loool

hay time is just a construct of our universe. we could take away time and we wouldnt experience it (head asplode) like taking away our 3d by drawing people on a piece of paper. they are stuck in 2d and dont experience our extra 3d plane head asplode tldr thanks for reading

ok. me thinks it is a weasel me thinks it is a qweasd po asdfgh jk az b oiuytr all three contain the same amount of level 1 info or "statistical" information. me thinks it is a weasel . this contains level 2 information or "functional information". this is the only information that matters. a sender with knowledge of the code understands the recipient must also have knowledge of the code so they share the same "medium" if you will. life only cares about this "functional information" or lvl2 info. i cannot convey a message to someone using only lvl1 information. yes lvl1 information is necessary BUT it must be arranged in a fashion such that it yields lvl2 info. enter genetic mutations. myth-genetic mutations acting along eons of time+natural selection yields NEW genes which code for NEW proteins which serve a NEW purpose.(forget the abiogenesis problem) hi what are you doing today hi what are jkf dsafg erwqt sentence1=functional info or just "FI" if you will. sentence 2=statistical information remains the same but "noise" has been added and "information" has been lost/destroyed. no loss of lvl1 info-it remains the same.lvl2 info has been destroyed. (geneticists comment please ) so even if a mutation swaps round some nucleotides and lvl1 info remains the same lvl2 info gets destroyed. (correct sequencing for coding has been lost) so how in our universe can a "mutation" even one that leaves the same amount of nucleotides but adds "noise" ever add information? any mutation DECREASES information. we would need-new nucleotides coming into being that yield "information" if it is a naturalistic process in our universe it is impossible. if we allow the supernatural 2 miracles would do it. new physical base pairs/nucleotides+in the correct information yielding sequence. 2 miracles. comment please thanks for reading.

hay. this is not reality. the above locks in place when it is correct. i am going to make another thread on the impossiblity for mutations to generate any new "information" like what n-d-t says they do.

ok cool thanks dude interesting... also if i could just ask another question. - enzymes=proteins right? in the stomach we have hcl and pepsin. if one were to take pancreatic enzymes hcl+pepsin would destroy the enzymes/proteins is this correct? thanks

just some interesting literature on the topic i understand this is sensitive to immunologists but oh well http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/22350041 this one is imo how you design a study to yield the conclusion you want....just found it interesting..... http://ebm.rsmjourna...228/6/660.short didnt realize they actually had peer reviewed literature like the one above... <link removed> ok...chart page 3......

hay this may have been posted in the past just thought what yous think of it seems pretty cool